System Vs. Player

DChess · 03-06-2007, 01:10 PM

This is a question i ask myself alot, is it the player doing well, or is it just the coaching staff and his system. I know theres a in between, but for the sake of arguement and this thread pick one.

A few examples.

Patriots Defense:
Seem to let alot of free agents go, becasue they feel they can find another player and just plug him in.

Denver RB's
Shanahan is a mastermind, and he seems to find any RB and put him in.

Some players that could jsut be good because of the system.
Reggie Wayne
Larry Johnson
Steve Smith (Why i feel this way, mushin muhammed was the #1 wideout in carolina, then went on to chicago and hasnt put up the same numbers, i feel the number 1 wideout in carolinas Ofense would succeed no matter who it is)

theres alot others, list some you think

Ho0k Em' · 03-06-2007, 01:12 PM

What's the basis on LJ being a system back?

terribletowel39 · 03-06-2007, 01:18 PM

no matter what pittsburgh always finds good-great LB's when they let them go.

DChess · 03-06-2007, 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ho0k Em'

What's the basis on LJ being a system back?

um priest holmes, and they have one of the best O-Lines in the nfl, some of the wholes they open up are just ridiculous, you can drive a semi through it

yourfavestoner · 03-06-2007, 01:22 PM

Talent is always more important that a system. Just look at Wade Phillips. He was inept running the 3-4 in Atlanta, but got to San Diego, who has the best personnel for a 3-4 in the league, and turned them into a monster unit.

Ho0k Em' · 03-06-2007, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DChess

um priest holmes, and they have one of the best O-Lines in the nfl, some of the wholes they open up are just ridiculous, you can drive a semi through it

We had 2 above average lineman last year..Waters is one of the best OG's in the game, and Weigmann is a ver solid center though he's up there in age. Shields is barely average anymore, and the tackles are a mess. I don't know if we even had a top 12 line last year. LJ didn't have very many huge holes last year.

yourfavestoner · 03-06-2007, 01:27 PM

Yeah, Kansas City's offensive line was adequate, and calling it that is being generous.

Shiver · 03-06-2007, 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yourfavestoner

Talent is always more important that a system. Just look at Wade Phillips. He was inept running the 3-4 in Atlanta, but got to San Diego, who has the best personnel for a 3-4 in the league, and turned them into a monster unit.

I think you stole my argument from a similar thread last year.. LOL

Splat · 03-06-2007, 01:31 PM

When are non Chiefs fans going to understand our OL is not even close to being what it was two years ago?

MaxV · 03-06-2007, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DChess

This is a question i ask myself alot, is it the player doing well, or is it just the coaching staff and his system. I know theres a in between, but for the sake of arguement and this thread pick one.

A few examples.

Patriots Defense:
Seem to let alot of free agents go, becasue they feel they can find another player and just plug him in.

Denver RB's
Shanahan is a mastermind, and he seems to find any RB and put him in.

Some players that could jsut be good because of the system.
Reggie Wayne
Larry Johnson
Steve Smith (Why i feel this way, mushin muhammed was the #1 wideout in carolina, then went on to chicago and hasnt put up the same numbers, i feel the number 1 wideout in carolinas Ofense would succeed no matter who it is)

theres alot others, list some you think

Reggie Wayne - The Colts tried a bunch of people at #2 WR unsuccessfully, until Wayne came along. Don't forget that Wayne was drafted in what was suppose to be a LOADED WR class. His scouting report said that he was the best route runner in that draft. He and Chad Johnson are by far the best of that class and they had a few WRs picked before them.

Larry Johnson - This guy is a great RB. His vision/size/quickness combination is one of the best in the NFL. He would succeed in any system.

Steve Smith - He too is great. Muhammed isn't a good example, as it's pretty hard for him to put up great numbers with Chicago's offense, which is run-oriented.

yourfavestoner · 03-06-2007, 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shiver

I think you stole my argument from a similar thread last year.. LOL

;) Who hasn't stolen an argument from you?

Although, another example I guess I can make is Gruden in Oakland and in Tampa Bay.

MaxV · 03-06-2007, 01:47 PM

If you want an example of a system player, perhaps Demarcus Ware (along with a few other 3-4 OLBs).

A lot of 3-4 OLBs may only be able to play as situational pass-rushers in 4-3 system.

I'm not saying Ware would only be situational player in 4-3, he is a freakish athlete, but I do think he wouldn't be able to be as great.

KBear · 03-07-2007, 01:41 PM

Some of those 3-4 OLB could be starting DE in the teams that run the tampa 2 defence.

And yes talent is still important, but talent that fits the system a teams running is just as important becuase you can probably find a cheaper player that fills a need with a middle or late round pick. And finding talent that fits the system thats being run seems to be a difficult task for some teams, and those teams are the ones that waste too much money on free agents.

hugepunch · 03-07-2007, 02:29 PM

there are system players out there but coaches get to much credit sometimes.

Quote:

Denver RB's
Shanahan is a mastermind, and he seems to find any RB and put him in.

hes a mastermind at finding talent. you just cant take any mook and make him a 1200 yard guy.

JT Jag · 03-07-2007, 02:56 PM

Players, not plays.

If an offensive coordinator was given Barry Sanders in his early-prime, but Sanders didn't fit with his current offense... then that offensive coordinator would toss out his old offense and start from scratch.

BlindSite · 03-07-2007, 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DChess

Steve Smith (Why i feel this way, mushin muhammed was the #1 wideout in carolina, then went on to chicago and hasnt put up the same numbers, i feel the number 1 wideout in carolinas Ofense would succeed no matter who it is)

Well Mushin Muhummad and Steve Smith are in different categories. The offensive system was adjusted when Muhummad had to be the number one. Muhummad ran all of his routes from when he was the 2nd receiver and keary colbert ran steve smith's routes. When Smith came back and Muhummad Left Colbert shifted into Muhummads role.

So it doesn't really fit. The only constant was Delhomme.

yourfavestoner · 03-07-2007, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlindSite

Well Mushin Muhummad and Steve Smith are in different categories. The offensive system was adjusted when Muhummad had to be the number one. Muhummad ran all of his routes from when he was the 2nd receiver and keary colbert ran steve smith's routes. When Smith came back and Muhummad Left Colbert shifted into Muhummads role.

So it doesn't really fit. The only constant was Delhomme.

And that fits with the complaint that Delhomme doesn't spread the ball around enough.

Don Vito · 03-07-2007, 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JT Jag

Players, not plays.

If an offensive coordinator was given Barry Sanders in his early-prime, but Sanders didn't fit with his current offense... then that offensive coordinator would toss out his old offense and start from scratch.

Not in Jonathan Vilma's case. Was one of the best young defensive players in the NFL (and the clear-cut leader of the Jets D) as a relatively small MLB in the 4-3, and as we all know they switched to the 3-4 where he had a down year as a very undersized 3-4 ILB.

yourfavestoner · 03-07-2007, 06:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KBear

Some of those 3-4 OLB could be starting DE in the teams that run the tampa 2 defence.

Which goes to show that players with enough talent can be successful in multiple schemes.

Microphon200 · 03-07-2007, 06:14 PM

Every player is a product of the coaching and the system to a certain extent. However, it varies depending the player.

BlindSite · 03-07-2007, 06:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yourfavestoner

And that fits with the complaint that Delhomme doesn't spread the ball around enough.

Which is pretty much bs.

Look at 03 and 04. That only came in 05 when Colbert was injured and we had to throw to running backs. Then we bring in Johnson who had a nice season of 70 catches 800 yards and 4tds.

The only time carolina's second receiver didn't go over 700 yards was in 05 when there were injuries. Delhomme spreads the ball around, the offensive philosophy was feed the studs which is why they got so much ball. Davidson will change things.

bigbluedefense · 03-07-2007, 06:58 PM

One of the themes with the 3-4 defense "system players" you referred to is this: dominant trench players.

The battles are won and lost in the trenches, and LBs are only as good as the trench players in front of them. Those trench players disrupt the play at the point of attack and allow LBs to make plays.

Pittsburgh and NE are both able to stick players in at LB and have success because they have dominant players in the front 3. They both use the 2 gap technique, and both are able to maximize the performance of their LB core with excellent trench play.

Look at Dallas. They have a better LB core than the Steelers, but theyre not as productive. Its because their trench players were not great. SD was great because of their front 3...Cleveland was average because of an abysmal front 3, despite having talent at the LB core. Its a recurring theme...win the battle in the trenches, and you can get away with lesser talent in the back 7. Thats the case with every defense in the league.

etk · 03-07-2007, 07:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yourfavestoner

;) Who hasn't stolen an argument from you?

Although, another example I guess I can make is Gruden in Oakland and in Tampa Bay.

What about Gruden...explain please?

I can't believe no one has mentioned Mike Furrey. He probably wouldn't even have made at least half of the NFL rosters last year, and then he catches almost 100 balls under Martz.